(photo credit: Lumiere)

As reported by Emily Schiola in today’s ODE, ASUO Vice President Katie Taylor and former OSPIRG Board Chair Charles Denson have been engaged in wedlock since November 2009, when Denson was working for the notorious fee-wasting “student” group.  Since Denson was the chair of OSPIRG’s board until a month ago, this raises huge questions of favoritism and conflict of interest in the support the Eckstein-Taylor administration has shown for OSPIRG. Apparently there were also members to the ASUO who were complicit in hiding this important piece of information from the student body.

“Taylor acknowledged that there are members of the ASUO who know about the marriage,” Schiola wrote, “but said [she] doesn’t talk about her personal life often.”

Though both Taylor and Denson assert  “that they keep their professional and personal lives separate,” it seems incredibly unlikely that they wouldn’t be at least doing a little ASUO role-play every now and then (“I make a motion to put myself inside you….” “Motion accepted.”).

All sex talk aside, its incredibly shady and irresponsible of Taylor to hide this from the student body she claims to support, especially with the OSPIRG budget decision looming (for those not in the know, they want to up it by 97 percent. Yes, really.) How can approving an unnecessary budget increase for a program that your HUSBAND was Board Chair of not more than a month ago not be construed as favoritism? We will have to see how Taylor rationalizes that one.

There have been rumblings that this is purely a sham marriage concocted to receive better financial benefits (much like my own) something that is incredibly illegal and distasteful for two people holding public office (but completely acceptable for two editors of a political humor rag.)

What will come of this explosive revelation? Probably nothing, because 80-9 percent of the student body has no idea what OSPIRG is beyond the annoying canvassers who stand outside of Lillis. But for the tiny percentage of us who give a fuck about the dishonest conduct of our governing body, Taylor has amends to make. She should either A) divorce Denson and defund OSPIRG; B) renew their vows together in the Fishbowl on a crowded Wednesday afternoon and defund OSPIRG; or C) engage in polygamy with Robert D’Andrea and Denson to make this Devil’s threesome complete and defund OSPIRG . These are the only acceptable way for her to rectify her insidious betrayal to the students of UO.

(Edit: an earlier version of this post was published under Alex Tomchak Scott’s name. The real author was Sophie.)

Publisher Emeritus Ross Coyle (pictured) and Editor-in-Chief Sophia Lawhead have been in a sham marriage for two years. They have never so much as been photographed together.

Look, it didn’t occur to us until now that this would be an issue, but our editor-in-chief and publisher emeritus have been married for two years.

Better financial aid packages are available to married students and, though Publisher Emeritus Ross Coyle’s schooling was paid for because he is a member of the US Army Reserve, Editor-in-Chief Sophia Lawhead would not have had the money to attend the University of Oregon if her sham marriage to Coyle didn’t up her financial aid.

Coyle has said he thought the marriage would be a romantic union when he entered into it. Lawhead admits she perpetuated that illusion.

The Commentator is unapologetic about this situation. It’s a matter of class. Some of us have rich parents who can pay our way through school. Others need to defraud the government. It’s all in the game.

Lawhead said her relationship with Coyle “has not had any impact” on the Commentator’s affairs.

“This year, I have been more removed from the Oregon Commentator than I ever have,” Lawhead said.

We wouldn’t have even mentioned it except that it seems this kind of thing is such a big deal to everybody.

Every once in a while, one looks at the front page of the ODE, pauses for consideration, and realizes that there is a huge divide between how much clout the ASUO has, and how much it thinks it has. On those days, it strikes one that ASUO has something of a Twitter Famous mentality: the small amount of power they are allotted makes them feel as if they have infinitely more sway than they actually do.

This is one of those days.

Last night the ASUO passed a resolution declaring its opposition to concealed-carry on campus. According to the Ol’Dirty, “The resolution reasons that a ban on conceal-carry weapons is not a Second Amendment restriction after a U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2010 stated schools were considered a ‘sensitive’ place, and thus laws barring firearms were not restricted.” Further, it was noted that because the primary purpose of a gun is to “cause lethal bodily harm”, it should not be permitted on campus, versus potentially dangerous but useful objects such as knives.

Those potatoes aren’t going to chop themselves.

Nowhere in the Daily Emerald article, however, is the meaninglessness and inanity of the whole situation specifically noted. What purpose does this serve? Who was banging down the ASUO’s front door begging them to send down their official declaration on the matter from on high? Contrary to what the Emerald’s headline claims, the ASUO does seem to have enough self-awareness to know that they didn’t actually change state law by passing this resolution. Their hope seems to be that if (with the implicit “and when” undoubtedly present in their minds) the state decides to revisit the concealed-carry on campus situation, the ASUO will be in support of a reinstated ban. My question is, why does the ASUO think the state gives a shit?

Please senators, for the love of God, I beg of you–do something useful with yourselves. How long did this resolution take to argue out? How many man hours were lost that could have been better spent on actually doing something that is within your limited power to do?

The Commentator has had an equipment request waiting on your nod since November. Why not manipulate that power?

Last night Prez Beckstein attempted to transfer a reported $40,516 from the Exec budget to the Sustainability Center, setting a dangerous precedent of favoritism among programs and allowing the ASUO Exec to, in the words of Senator Lange, “pick and choose who to bring up through the ranks while ignoring the process.” The lovely Lyzi Diamond first called it back in October 2010.

Ex-Commie and ASUO legend in the making Emily Schiola explains it all in the ODE:

The ASUO Executive’s request to transfer money from their budget to the budget of the Sustainability Center sparked a discussion of process last night at the ASUO Senate meeting and ultimately brought a failed vote.

According to certain members of the Programs Finance Committee, the center has a questionable past.

In September 2008, the ASUO Internship Class being taught by the Oregon Student Association’s campus coordinator chose to instead hire a Graduate Teaching Fellow to teach the class under the directive of then-ASUO President Sam Dotters-Katz.

In 2010, Emma Kallaway decided to eliminate the GTF position and give the class back to the OSA. She then allocated the money that was previously used for the GTF to the coordinator of the center.

Since the center was not yet a program, they had to be given money from the Executive’s budget.

Now the center is officially a program, and ASUO President Ben Eckstein is requesting to move budget money into the center’s own budget so it will no longer be placed in the Executive Budget.

What appeared to be a simple act of housekeeping quickly turned into a question of process. Many senators showed concern that the Sustainability Center wasn’t created through the proper channels.

Sen. Kaitlyn Lange was concerned that this program was only created because they used their friends in the Executive to bypass the system.

“I feel like the Exec can pick and choose who to bring up through the ranks while ignoring the (Programs Finance Committee) process,” she said.

Her feelings were echoed by Sen. Benjamin Rudin.

“It isn’t fair that programs can jump the queue,” he said. “(Executive) is making winners and losers.”

While some senators saw this as an excuse to keep the Executive more accountable, others viewed is a straightforward money transfer.

“How does voting no on this put a stop to things like this in the future?” Sen. Ben Bowmanasked. “The Sustainability Center has been a success, and it wouldn’t be here today if that hadn’t happened.”

Lange countered by arguing if the money is transferred and never discussed again, the way the center was created might be overlooked and could happen again.

A wary-looking Eckstein again made the point that this transfer would make it so transferring the money is a way to match up what is being spent on the center.

The tension in the room mounted, and the Senate became increasingly divided when a vote was finally called, deciding not to transfer the money at this time.

We’ll have to wait until next Wednesday to see if the transfer passes the senate.

After a week long vote ending last Friday, UO students gave a big “no thanks” to a new EMU/SRC remodel, and to a $100 i-fee increase.

Beckstein thought that, due to the 9 percent tuition increase this year, students found the idea of shelling out even more cash a little disagreeable. Or, at least, those students who even knew the vote was being held.

The ASUO President was optimistic about the fate of the renovation, stating that a rework of the plan was “feasible.”

Student Affairs VP Robin Holmes was in her fortress of solitude and could not be reached for comment.

We are having major technical difficulties. To find the live coverage of the ASUO Senate Meeting, go to the Oregon Daily Emerald website.

This seems like some sort of conspiracy…

Here is the link

Today starts the beginning of a five-day opportunity to vote on the EMU and Student Rec Center (SRC) renovations. I’m sure many of you have been getting annoying emails all day telling you how you should vote. I’m not going to do that. I don’t care how you vote and neither does the Commentator, but it is important to know what you’re voting on.

The first question is asking if you are okay with paying $35 a term to renovate the SRC There will be a juice bar, which I know is a big selling point to the lovely Sophie Lawhead. So keep that in mind.

The second question is asking if you’re cool with paying $65 a term to renovate the EMU. So that’s 35 plus 65. I write words, I don’t do math so figure it out for yourself.

Number three is about stipends. You can read my stipend post or read something educate yourself on that issue.

The next section took the Senate 10 hours to write so pay close attention.

If the EMU remodel is approved, should any student groups have their square footage space reduced in the new EMU?

Basically do you think the Insurgent deserves less space, probably? But be careful here because you might get beat up by the Women’s Center.

Should the EMU governance board continue to have a majority of non-elected student members?

Should average Joes help design the new building?

If the EMU remodel is approved, should the facility be closed during construction?

Would you like all hell to break loose for two years? Or you can think of it as a massive game of musical chairs. Everyone likes musical chairs.

And that’s really all my jurisdiction. The rest is about sports and stuff so you would have to consult someone who cares a little more, like the people in the drowning glass building… Happy voting!

What does ASUO President Benjamin Eckstein think about the termination of President Lariviere? That is an excellent question and even though I interviewed Eckstein about the matter I am still left wondering. Below is a summary of the interview. The amount of time it takes you to read is the amount of time the interview lasted. He should get an award for being diplomatic.

Because the majority of the EMU was closed for Thanksgiving the interview took place in the back room of the ASUO office. In the office, there was a pepper shaker but no salt shaker, which I found suspicious but decided to ignore it and start the interview.

Eckstein started out by saying that him and Lariviere have had their disagreements but he respects Lariviere very much and has every intention on working with him if he is allowed to stay. So forth and so on.

Then he mentioned that there are smart people on both sides with good points, and this is a good discussion to have at the state level because it is important.

I thought I had him when he said it’s good it is happening, but he meant that it’s a big issue and should be handled by the state.

After a little prodding (I reminded him that he is a politician and he has to have more to say about the future of his university) he said that he is going to do everything in his power to make sure that students are being held at the forefront of all these decisions because they are they ones being affected. He wants to “give them a seat at the table when decisions are being made.”

He said, “Students should be meaningfully involved and consulted.” He wants to make sure that  people who usually don’t have a voice in these kinds of circumstances have a say in things that will be directly impacting them.

When asked about his testimony, he said it will basically be about students. It seemed like he had students on his mind.

I will try to crack this nut again after the decision is made. But for now, well played Eckstein.

You asked for it, so here it is. The new stipend increases for the 2012-2013 year. Bust open your wallets friends and family.

The president and vice president will now be making $600 a month. Chief of staff will be making $350 a month. Your everyday run of the mill senator will be making $150.

When dealing with programs, things get a little bit more complicated. Programs will be split into four classes. Class 1 gets a lump sum of $725 while Class 1 will receive $275 a month. It is up to the group to divide up the money amongst members.

Programs like the Multicultural Center and Women’s Center are exempt from this cap.

So after all these numbers, the moral of the story is that incidental fees will be increasing next year by $93,852. About $4.47 per person. Not terrible.

On Thursday, our fearless leader Ben Eckstein announced that the referendum on the renovation of the EMU will be postponed until spring term.

In a letter written to the ODE today, Eckstein explained his hesitation was due to various concerns from student groups on campus and the lack of student input on part of the design of the EMU.

He explained that it is important to him that students are able to take the lead on this project and doesn’t believe that can be done at this time. By postponing the vote, he is hoping students will be more educated on the changes and decide to speak their opinions.

Another concern of the student body president is the possibility of mid-year tuition increases. If those should be put in place he wants to give the students time to figure out just how much they would be willing to pay for the EMU expansions.

It all comes down to five more months to decide whether or not to redo the EMU.

So what does this mean for an average student? Well, there are three kinds of people who will be affected differently.

First, there are those who have been diligently reading updates on the EMU referendum and anxiously awaiting the vote. Sorry to tell you, you are just going to have to wait to vote. The good news for you is you have more time to obsess over what color you want your group’s office to be.

Second, there are those who didn’t even know it was happening until reading about the postponement. You all have the opprotunity to either become someone from the first category or continue to be someone in the third category. The good news for you is you until spring term to decide!

Lastly, there are those who didn’t care to begin with and won’t care now. These are the kinds of people who don’t read campus publications and don’t even know how to vote. The good news for  you is, your life will be exactly the same.

What does this mean for Ben Eckstein?

He pissed even more people off with this one, but a lot of people still don’t really care. Basically his legacy will be changing a date. Big stuff.

What does this mean for the Oregon Commentator?

Now we can finally begin our take over of the EMU, one voter at a time. . .

It would appear that there are on students on campus who are not as stoked about the EMU Referendum postponement as Ben Eckstein.

In fact, one student, Benjamin Ordonez, filed a request to have the president impeached. Ordonez was the campaign manager for Eckstein’s opposition last year, Students United and he is pissed.

In his request for Eckstein’s removal, Ordonez stated that he feels as if Eckstein “violated not only specific provisions of the ASUO Constitution, but core principals that make up the very fabric of our democratic process.”

He stated in his request that he is worried that at this rate, the student president will be given too much control and the voice of the student body will be stifled.

Ordonez wishes to see the original referendum date restored and Eckstein booted from office.

Orodnez is not the only one who is heated about Exec’s decision. Club Sports Executive Committee sent a letter to various student groups who are housed in the EMU urging them to speak out against the postponement.

According to the letter, Club Sports does not believe that there is enough room in the EMU for all the student groups that have requested space.

They believe the renovations should take place as soon as possible in order to allow for everyone who needs room.

Also, they informed the students that even though we will not be moving forward with the renovations, there is still an architect on retainer, just waiting to be utilized. This will raise the initial cost.

The EMU Board of Directors is equally dissatisfied with the decision. In a letter written to the ASUO Executive, the Board reveled that they were not consulted before Eckstein made his decision.

The letter said, “Throughout this process, the ASUO Executive has called out Student Affairs for a lack of student inclusion, but so far the only ones cutting students out of the process is the ASUO Executive.”

The letter also said that there was limited proof to support Eckstein’s claim that students were not informed enough to vote on this issue. “It assumes that the student body was not capable of informing themselves before the vote,” the Board said.

Also, because of this postponement the EMU rennovation project will lose 10 to 20 million dollars. All for the sake of waiting a few months.

All in all, it would seem that Ben Eckstein and the Exec board screwed up royally. It seems like this decision might have just cost us a president and potentially a new EMU.